Page:Roman public life (IA romanpubliclife00greeiala).pdf/202

 (auxilium) made by the individual who felt himself injured by the decree. The appeal had to be made personally to the magistrate and the intercessio exercised personally by him. Thus we find tribunes tracking the footsteps of consuls to offer help on the occasion of an expected levy, and a praetor taking up his position close to the chair of his colleague, waiting for appeals from his decisions. In civil jurisdiction the intercessio might be employed at any stage of the proceedings before the magistrate (in jure); the appeal was usually from one of the city praetors to another, although they might possess different judicial departments (provinciae). The general principle was to give the mutual right of veto to magistrates possessing somewhat similar authority and knowledge. But this rule did not apply to the tribune. His interference was directed against both civil and criminal jurisdiction, and against the exercise of administrative power, especially that of the consul. In such cases as the consular conscription or the quaestor's collection of the taxes, it is not the general decree that is opposed by the tribune, but its application to individual cases by the coercitio of the magistrate. An appeal of this kind made to the tribunes sometimes became the subject of a quasi-judicial process, especially if it had been made to the whole college. A picture of this process, which has been preserved, shows the appeal made from a consular levy; the appellants and the magistrate appealed against appear before the benches of the tribunes (ad subsellia tribunorum); the collegium weighs the arguments and then gives its verdict, sometimes with the grounds of its decision. It is possible that the college may in these cases have agreed to give the finding by a majority of votes,